Woodhose Pty Ltd T/A South Pacific Private Hospital

[2014] FWCA 7074

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Woodhose Pty Ltd T/A South Pacific Private Hospital
(AG2014/9028)

SOUTH PACIFIC PRIVATE AND NSWNMA/ANMF ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2014-2017.

Health and welfare services
DEPUTY PRESIDENT BOOTH	SYDNEY, 8 OCTOBER 2014

Application for approval of the South Pacific Private and NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the South Pacific Private and NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Woodhose Pty Ltd T/A South Pacific Private Hospital. The agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The New South Wales Nurses and Midwives’ Association & New South Wales Branch of the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act, I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 15 October 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2017.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Woodhose Pty Ltd, trading as South Pacific Private Hospital, applied to the Fair Work Commission for approval of the South Pacific Private and NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017. The application was made in accordance with section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009, with the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) and the New South Wales Nurses and Midwives Association (NSWNMA) as the applicant unions. The primary dispute was whether the agreement met the requirements for approval under the Fair Work Act, specifically whether it contained provisions that unfairly disadvantaged employees or contravened the Act's provisions.

The Fair Work Commission considered several legal issues, including whether the agreement provided for fair and reasonable terms and conditions for the employees, and whether it complied with the Act’s provisions on minimum entitlements. Additionally, the Commission assessed whether the agreement contained provisions that were contrary to the public interest or had an adverse effect on employees' health and safety. The unions argued that certain provisions were unfair and did not adequately protect employee rights, while Woodhose Pty Ltd contended that the agreement was fair and met all legislative requirements.

In its decision, the Fair Work Commission found that the agreement did not contain any unfair provisions and met the criteria for approval under the Act. The Commission noted that the agreement provided for reasonable terms and conditions, including provisions for pay rates, hours of work, and leave entitlements. The Commission also determined that the agreement did not contravene the Act's provisions on minimum entitlements and did not have any adverse effect on employees' health and safety. Consequently, the Fair Work Commission approved the agreement, finding it to be fair and reasonable.

The Fair Work Commission ordered that the South Pacific Private and NSWNMA/ANMF Enterprise Agreement 2014-2017 be approved in accordance with section 234 of the Fair Work Act 2009. This decision confirmed the agreement's validity and allowed it to be implemented for the specified period.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established